Jump to content

Pancho

Members
  • Content count

    207
  • Donations

    0.00 CAD 
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

9 Neutral

About Pancho

  • Rank
    Initiate

Personal Information

  • Name
    Tom
  • Location
    Germany

Recent Profile Visitors

2,021 profile views
  1. All FEM scenes broken in 16.5?

    Thanks, Luke. But sometimes the know how from yesterday needs to incorportated in today's scene. Point is, I need to find an alternative for the stuff I need to do. If targetv doesn't work anymore, than SESI should come up with a page and document why this is so and what workflow replaces the former one. Right now it seems I can save myself with targetP, but not knowing what's going on disables you in recreating your workflow properly.
  2. All FEM scenes broken in 16.5?

    Here's my scene set up. test_001_a_0004.hiplc
  3. All FEM scenes broken in 16.5?

    I try to open several scenes which worked fine before (presumably in 15.5) and now in 16.5 don't. Simple scenes with cloth, FEM and SOP solvers. When I open the scene I get a long list of unrecognized parameters. What annoys me most is the fact that the SOP solver (with enable solver) can set targetv, but the cloth object doesn't care the slightest. FEM solver and SOP solver are both connected to the multisolver. The points do have targetv set, but there is no force applied to the points. v is 0 on all channels? This worked before! What has changed? Since this stuff happens all the time with Houdini, are there any pages on the web which document these changes and what kind of consequences this has on the workflow? But for now: Why is targetv of no interest to the FEM solver? Cheers Tom
  4. Two WEDGE node questions

    Hi Miles, yes. I discovered that you can have multiple entries in the WEDGE node, but the way I took is to have three of them, since I didn't know how the way you propose will evaluate. So far this problem seems to be solved. I'm just rendering. What I did: Three wedge nodes connected to each other. Each wedge node refers to the same ROP. In my heightfield geo I use a null with three custom float inputs. Each of these is connected to the wedge channel of a wedge node. One float entry, one wedge node. My heightfield erode is taking its values from the NULL and by using the pow function I get my 1, 2, 4, 8, ... values and so on. The ROP node uses the referenced values in order to come up with all the different filenames. I'll post some images later on. My only worry now is how to evaluate the results visually. Three wedges with 10 iterations = 1000 variations. : (
  5. Quick and simple: a) How do I combine multiple wedge nodes? There seems to be only one $WEDGE and $WEDGENUM variable. I want to have several settings change, e.g. evaporation rate and rainflow_spreaditerations in the heightfield erode node during the sim. Four iterations through wedge node A and 5 through wedge node B should result in twenty different simulations. But how do I save the files if there is only one $WEDGENUM? In this case I need two wedgenums, in other cases probably more. The range and number of steps seem to be linear. In some cases it is more apropriate to use 1, 2, 4, 8, 16,.... as values. Is this possible? Thanks for any advice! Tom
  6. From what I understand the gas adjust elasticity node is able to change the rest length between the particles. I imagine that by doing so the grain particles can move further apart without breaking the constraint. At least that is what I hope, have the particles further apart but still connected, like something slimy. There have been many request on this subject, but the info given so far is a bit dull. The only tutorial is about gas strain, but I guess that is somehow implemented in grains already. But the rest length changes aren't documented anywhere as far as I can tell. Anybody an idea how to use this node? When I connect it, I always get an exclamation mark and I don't see an effect. So, what is the secret? Cheers Tom
  7. Realistic forces for flip waves

    I'm currently experimenting with forces to create breaking waves in FLIP. I manage to create the general shape of a breaking waves by using a custom vel volume. One problem is that the force still works when the wave is breaking. Obviously the breaking/falling particles shouldn't experience any upwards forces anymore. Of course I can limit forces to only apply if the particles are beneath water level. But I wonder if there is a more realistic approach. A way to determine whether the particles should still experience a force or not. In a way this should be determined by whether or not these particles are "connected" to the main ocean. Another approach could be to check if there are any particles in the direction where the force is coming from. No particles, no way to transfer the vel. But since there are soooo many solvers and ways to deal with FLIPs, is there a general approch to this problem? Cheers Tom
  8. Group by detail not working

    Got it. @id == `detail("../repeat_begin1_metadata1", "iteration", 0) `
  9. I run against a wall. Group expression: @id == detail("../repeat_begin1_metadata1", "iteration", 0) It doesn't evaluate as expected. Getting in the detail attribute this way doesn't work. WHY!? And what is the correct way to do so? Thanks in advance!
  10. Flip fluid "noise"

    Thanks so much for the imput. I wonder how to use a whirlpool shape in order to shape the particles. I guess there are to possibilities. a) Have a sim with a collisin/attraction surface or straighten out a flat sim and reshapie it to the desired form. in case anyone successfully managed to use a narrow band fluid for a whirlpool sim, please step forward and report about your endeavour. Wonder whether it is possible. All my undertakings were unsuccessful as the surface always dropped below the waterline.
  11. Is AMD potentially risky? (Threadripper)

    Guess I'm tending towards the Noctua again. In case it won't be god enough I can still go for liquid cooling afterwards. But since I'm not an overclocker, it might be just fine.
  12. Is AMD potentially risky? (Threadripper)

    Just found these builds. I just wonder about the RAM colling for the Ripjaws. Is it required? Will it fit? Or will two ventilators above the cooler blowing hot air out of the case be enough? https://pcpartpicker.com/b/FrRJ7P https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Em2mwq1PRC4
  13. Is AMD potentially risky? (Threadripper)

    Well, the tests done between watercooling and the Noctua range (no other fans, only Noctua, ) were a bit unfair, since the cooling plate from the watercooler never fit the TR4 size. It was roundish and didn't cover the whole chip area. So watercooling seems to be better if it does fit (test done with the Enermax), BUT actually I never loved the idea of watercooling and DON'T want to use it. But as you've said, there will be problems with the first PCI slot. I definitely want to use two cards in the PCI 16x slots with a distance between them. So it all depends on the motherboard and whether the clearance is there or not. Noctua was my first choice, too. All PCs here are equipped with them. Need to check whether there are any builds with the Noctua and if the GPU will fit. Thanks for your concerns. Identical to mine! : )
  14. Flip fluid "noise"

    Guess I discovered why the fluid drops down to the bottom of the fluid tank! The reason seems to be the whirlpool itself. As soon as the forces start to tear a center hole into the flip fluid, the fluid drops from the center towards the border to the bottom. There are still particles generated at the former borderline which crawl down the outer limits of the sim tank. So the question seems to be, how to generate a swirl in the center of the sim without tearing a hole, but a tornado like tube going down as far as possible. The thicker the narrowband, the later the waterline drops down. But the point is to keep it shallow in order to get more details at the same particle count. Wonder whether one needs to sim this in a flat tank and then deform the surface or particles afterwards to get the swirl/tornado depression in the surface.
  15. Flip fluid "noise"

    Yes. In order to get the details I guess there is no way around it, BUT I'm too unexperienced with flip fluid workflows in general. Is there a way to upres the medium resolution sized sim , based on the velocity field and the particle positions? My idea of simulating flips is to get the high res detail in one go, which might be the wrong approach. I guess the most important step now would be to get the volume surface right, so that the waterlevel stays the same. This is annoying to have a nice narrow band simulation which crashes down to the bottom of the sea (sim tank). Afterwards I can check the other problems. I'll try to post a scene file tomorrow. Cheers!
×